• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Answers 3 answers
  • Subscribers 63 subscribers
  • Views 43 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

BQ25630: Charge Current Accuracy

Jimmy zhou
Prodigy 40 points
Part Number: BQ25630
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: BQ25638, EV2400

Tool/software:

Hi Ti expert,

Here a question wants you to review and answer, in the datasheet of the charge current of the BQ25630, there is no limit info, which shown the TBD. do you know how many ranges it is? because i tested the battery charge current reach to 2.15A when i used the default setting of the ICHG（2A), is the charge current data in the range?

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 31280 points

    Hi Jimmy, 

    Thank you for reaching out via E2E. Please see my comments below. 

    ICHG_ACC specifications in the datasheet will be updated when this device is released to market. Initial pre-production samples of the BQ25630 IC may have worse accuracy than the final, released to market silicon will have. 

    The BQ25638, which is a released part, is a good reference for expected ranges for charge current accuracy. That datasheet lists accuracy at +/- 5% for ICHG = 1760mA and I would expect accuracy at 2A charge current on final silicon of BQ25630 to be similar. 

    Best Regards,

    Garrett 

  • 0 in reply to Garrett Kreger
    Prodigy 40 points

    Hi Garrett,

    thank you for the quick reply. Yes, i saw the BQ25638 has shown the detail ICHG_ACC info in the datasheet, but i tested the EVB of the BQ25630, the charge current didn't in the +/-5% when i used the default ICHG setting for the battery charging. i have tested the battery current on the EVB which is 2.16A, can i understand that the charging current out of the spec? or this is a normal data due to this is a new chipset, can't guarantee the limit of ICHG?

    PS: i recorded the current data is from the sampling resistor (as below capture).

  • 0 in reply to Jimmy zhou
    TI__Mastermind 31280 points

    Hi Jimmy, 

    This is normal and expected for pre release to market ICs. The BQ25630 samples you are testing are not final silicon so certain parameters you are testing will not meet accuracy targets. 

    Closer to the release to market date we can provide samples that are considered "final silicon" where you can expect the device to operate within charge current accuracy specifications.  

    Best Regards,

    Garrett

  • 0 in reply to Garrett Kreger
    Prodigy 40 points

    Hi Garrett,

    OK, thank you for the explanation. Here is another problem of the IINDPM which is shown as below capture for the IINDPM register setting. I want to know my battery (CV4.45V) charging duration time on the EVB, and I have to set the VREG to 4.45V by EV2400 tool for the battery can be entered the full of charging. but when i start to the battery charging progress, the ICO_IINDPM will be changed to 1A or 2A (as below capture) automatically. so that the battery charging current will be changed to 1A accordingly. now I can't get realistic charging duration time on my battery, and I don't know what problem it is. Do you know which item should be configuration as well for the charging go well? could you please give me some suggestion for me? 

  • 0 in reply to Jimmy zhou
    TI__Mastermind 31280 points

    Hi Jimmy, 

    The IINDPM is updated based on the input type detection function of the BQ25630. For example, if input is a standard 5V/3A USB-C input the ICO_IINDPM status register will output ICO_IINDPM = 3000mA. Additionally, using the EV2400 you can always overwrite the IINDPM setting by changing REG0x06 value. The maximum allowable setting is 3.2A. For your testing you may also want to disable the ICO feature. This can be done by setting 'EN_ICO' bit REG0x19[0] = 0b. 

    I recommend you ensure you are using a high enough rated input supply to support the charge current you are attempting to charge at. Charge duration will be longer if input supply cannot support the ICHG setting you are testing with.

    Please let me know if you have any further questions or if my response is not clear. 

    Best Regards,

    Garrett